Propagate coercions through match expressions. #19769
Merged
Conversation
This file contains bidirectional Unicode text that may be interpreted or compiled differently than what appears below. To review, open the file in an editor that reveals hidden Unicode characters.
Learn more about bidirectional Unicode characters
|
afaik if does not work, we can discuss on IRC though |
|
"truly" propagating coercions means more than just propagating expections, is part of it... |
|
So @nick29581 and I discussed on IRC and it seems that i'm a bit out of date, and we now use the expectation to drive coercion sometimes, particularly in ExprBlock scenarios. |
|
r+ though I'd like to know what's going on with |
bors
added a commit
that referenced
this pull request
Dec 18, 2014
r? @nikomatsakis We discussed coercions for `if` and `match` expressions. `if` seems to work already, was there some specific behaviour which wasn't working?
|
It seems this PR introduced #20055, a failure in |
|
And of course this PR is the one that introduced |
Sign up for free
to join this conversation on GitHub.
Already have an account?
Sign in to comment
Add this suggestion to a batch that can be applied as a single commit.
This suggestion is invalid because no changes were made to the code.
Suggestions cannot be applied while the pull request is closed.
Suggestions cannot be applied while viewing a subset of changes.
Only one suggestion per line can be applied in a batch.
Add this suggestion to a batch that can be applied as a single commit.
Applying suggestions on deleted lines is not supported.
You must change the existing code in this line in order to create a valid suggestion.
Outdated suggestions cannot be applied.
This suggestion has been applied or marked resolved.
Suggestions cannot be applied from pending reviews.
Suggestions cannot be applied on multi-line comments.
Suggestions cannot be applied while the pull request is queued to merge.
Suggestion cannot be applied right now. Please check back later.
r? @nikomatsakis
We discussed coercions for
ifandmatchexpressions.ifseems to work already, was there some specific behaviour which wasn't working?